Continuum Dislocation Theory Size

Continuum dislocation theory: size effects and
formation of microstructure
K.C. Le
Lehrstuhl f
ur Mechanik - Materialtheorie
Ruhr-Universit
at Bochum, 44780 Bochum, Germany
Workshop on Multiscale Material Modeling, Bad Herrenalb 2012
Collaborators: V. Berdichevsky, D. Kochmann, Q.S. Nguyen,

P. Sembiring, B.D. Nguyen
K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)
CDT: size effects, microstructure
Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012
1 / 78
Outline of my lecture
Size effects in crystal plasticity and formation of microstructure
Why continuum dislocation theory?
Thermodynamic framework of CDT
Antiplane constrained shear
Plane constrained shear
Double slip systems
Mechanism of twin formation
Continuum model of deformation twinning
Bending
Polygonization
Conclusion
Further works
2 / 78
Size effects in crystal plasticity and formation of

microstructures
Hall-Petch relation
Indentation
Shear, torsion, bending
Deformation twinning
Polygonization
Recrystallization
Grain growth
Texturing
ect.
3 / 78
Hall-Petch relation
Y Y 0 +
d
4 / 78
Indentation test
H=
F
A
(Hardness)
5 / 78
Twin formation
TEM micrograph of the [

111] oriented single crystal under tension. Strain
30%, Karaman et al., 2000
Polygonization
Polygonized state of a bent single crystal beam

7 / 78
View along intersections of slip planes with polygon boundaries in a

polygonized zinc crystal, Gilman, 1955
Why continuum dislocation theory?

Plastic deformations are due to nucleation, multiplication and motion
of dislocations
Dislocations appear to reduce energy of crystals
Motion of dislocations produces energy dissipation which causes the
resistance to their motion
Under favorable condition the rearrangement of dislocations by
dislocation climbing and gliding may reduce further energy of crystals
Deformation twinning and polygonization are low energy dislocation
structures
Continuum description is dictated by high dislocation densities
(108 -1014 m2 ). To compare: dislocation density 41011 m2 means
that the total length of dislocation loops in one cubic meter of crystal
equals the distance from the earth to the moon
9 / 78
Related literature
Continuum dislocation theory: Kondo,1952; Nye,1953; Bilby et
al.,1955; Kroner,1955,1958; Berdichevsky & Sedov,1967; Le &
Stumpf,1996a,b,c; Ortiz & Repetto,1999; Ortiz et al.,2000;
Acharya,2001; Svendsen,2002; Gurtin,2002,2004; Berdichevsky,2006;
Berdichevsky & Le,2007; Le & Sembiring,2008a,b,2009; Kochmann &
Le,2008,2009a,b; Le &Nguyen,2010,2011; Le & Nguyen,2012.
Strain gradient plasticity: Fleck et al.,1994; Shu & Fleck,1999; Gao et
al.,1999; Acharya & Bassani,2000; Huang et al.,2000,2004; Fleck &
Hutchinson,2001; Han et al.,2005; Aifantis & Willis,2005.
Statistical mechanics of dislocations: Le & Berdichevsky,2001,2002;
Groma et al.,2003,2005; Berdichevsky,2005,2006.
Discrete dislocation simulations: Needleman & Van der Giessen,2001;
Shu et al.,2001; Yefimov et al.,2004.
10 / 78
Thermodynamic framework of CDT

Kinematics
e =e +e
m
s
e
Small strain theory: unknown

P functions ui (x), ij (x)
Plastic distortion: ij = na=1 a (x)sia mja
Total (compatible) strain: ij = 21 (ui,j + uj,i )
Plastic (incompatible) strain: pij = 12 (ij + ji )
Elastic (incompatible) strain: eij = ij pij
11 / 78
Dislocation density
da
11
12
Bi =ijnjda
10
13
7
6
9
8
14
11 10
12
a)
13
14
4
b)
Dislocation density: ij = jkl il,k

Geometrical interpretation: Stokes theorem
Z
I
ij nj da =
ij j ds = Bi
S
Bi is the resultant Burgers vector of all GND (excess dislocations), whose

dislocation lines cuts the area S. For single slip the scalar dislocation
density is = b1 |jkl ,k ml nj |.
12 / 78
Energetics
State variables: elastic strain eij and dislocation density ij (plastic strain
and its gradient are history dependent and are not the state variables)
Free energy density (Kroner)
(ij pij , ij ) = 0 (ij pij ) + m (ij )
Elastic energy of the crystal lattice
1
0 (eij ) = Cijkl eij ekl
2
Energy of microstructure (single slip system, Berdichevsky, 2006)
m (ij ) = k ln
1
1 /s
Small up to moderate dislocation density

1 2
m (ij ) ' k
+
s
2 2s
13 / 78
Variational principles of CDT

Negligible resistance to dislocation motion: the energy minimization
Z
I (ui , ij ) =
(ij pij , ij )dx min
u,
Finite resistance to dislocation motion: Variational equation (Sedov,

Berdichesky, 1967)
Z
D
ij dx = 0
I +
ij
implying the evolution equation (of Biot type) for the plastic distortion
D

ij
ij
xk ij,k
ij
Note that, if the dissipation potential D = D( ij ) is a homogeneous
function of first order (rate-independent theory), the variational equation
reduces to the minimization of relaxed energy.
14 / 78
Antiplane constrained shear

y
x
L
a
z
A single crystal strip is placed in a hard device with the prescribed

displacements at the boundary
uz = y
overall shear strain (control parameter)
Assumption: a h, a L
15 / 78
Single slip system

Plastic distortion
zy = (x)
Since dislocation cannot reach the boundary x = 0, a, the plastic distortion
(y ) satisfies the constraints:
(0) = (a) = 0
The plastic strains are given by
1
pyz = pzy = (x).
2
The only non-zero component of tensor of dislocation density is
zz = ,x .
The free energy density of the crystal with dislocations takes a simple form
2
,x
|,x |
1
= ( )2 + k(
+ 2 2 ),
2
s b
s b
16 / 78
Energy minimization
If the resistance to dislocation motion is negligible, the true plastic
distortion minimizes the total energy
#
Z a"
2
,x
|,x |
1
2
( ) + k(
+ 2 2 ) dx
I [(x)] = hL
2
s b
s b
0
Introducing the dimensionless quantities
x = xbs ,
a = abs ,
E=
bs
I
hL
to rewrite the energy functional in the form

Z a
1
1 02
2
0
E [(x)] =
( ) + k(| | + ) dx
2
2
0
17 / 78
Energetic threshold

a- a
1
E = ( 0 )2 a + 2k|0 |
2
Minimization of this function shows that there exists the threshold value
en =
2k
abs
Size effect (typical to all gradient theories): the threshold value is inversely
proportional to the size a of the specimen.
18 / 78
Minimizer
Ansatz (based on the feature of dislocation pile-up)
for x (0, l),

1 (x)
(x) = m
for x (l, a l),
1 (a x) for x (a l, a),
Functional
Z l
E =2
0

1 02
1
1
2
0
( 1 ) + k 1 + 1
dx + ( m )2 (a 2l).
2
2
2
Function 1 (x) is subject to the boundary conditions

1 (0) = 0,
1 (l) = m .
19 / 78
Varying this energy functional with respect to 1 (x) we obtain the Euler
equation for 1 (x) on the interval (0, l)
1 + k100 = 0.
The variation of energy functional with respect to m and l yields the two
additional boundary conditions at x = l
10 (l) = 0,
2k = ( m )(a 2l).
Solution
l
x
x
1 (x) = (cosh tanh sinh ),
k
k
k
0 x l.
Transcendental equation to determine l

k
l
f (l) 2l + 2 cosh = a.
k
20 / 78
Evolution of plastic distortion
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
a
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Evolution of : a) = 0.001, b) = 0.005, c) = 0.01

21 / 78
Stress strain curve
/
0.0008
B
A
0.0006
0.0004
0.0002
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
22 / 78
Non-zero dissipation
For the case with dissipation ( > 0) we have to solve the evolution
equation
+ k,xx = c ,
(0) = (a) = 0,
with c = K /. Introduce the deviation of (t) from the critical shear, c ,

r = c > 0
r + k 00 = 0.
Thus, = r 1 . Similarly, for < 0: in all formulas must be replaced
by l = + c . For = 0 the evolution equation need not be satisfied. It
is replaced by = 0, so the plastic distortion is frozen.
23 / 78
Loading program
g
g*
-gc
Loading path
24 / 78
Hysteresis and Bauschinger effect
B
A
0.0004
0.0002
O
-0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.0015
0.0020
0.0025
0.0030
-0.0002
C
D
-0.0004
Average shear stress versus shear strain curve

25 / 78
Plane strain constrained shear
y
h
L
a
A single crystal strip is placed in a hard device with the prescribed

displacements at the boundary
u = y ,
v =0
at y = 0, h
overall shear strain (control parameter)

Assumption: h a L
26 / 78
Single slip system

The plastic distortion tensor
ij = (y )si mj
where
s = (cos , sin , 0),
m = ( sin , cos , 0)
Since dislocation cannot reach the boundary y = 0, h, the plastic

distortion (y ) satisfies the constraints:
(0) = (h) = 0
27 / 78
Strain measures
Total strain
xx = 0,
1
xy = u,y ,
2
yy = v,y
Plastic strains
1
pxx = sin 2,
2
1
pxy = cos 2,
2
1
pyy = sin 2
2
Elastic strain
1
1
exx = sin 2, exy = (u,y cos 2),
2
2
1
eyy = v,y sin 2
2
28 / 78
Nyes dislocation density
da
Bi =ijnjda
Non-zero components of dislocation density tensor

xz = ,y sin cos ,
yz = ,y sin2
Scalar dislocation density

1q 2
1
2 = | || sin |
=
xz + yz
,y
b
b
29 / 78
Energy density
Energy per unit volume of dislocated crystal

1
1
(eij , ij ) = (eii )2 + eij eij + k ln
2
1 s
, - Lame constants, b - magnitude of Burgers vector, s - saturated
dislocation density, k - material constant
30 / 78
Energy functional
Z h
1
1
1 2
v,y + (u,y cos 2)2 + 2 sin2 2
2
2
4
0

1
1
+ (v,y sin 2)2 + k ln
dy
| || sin |
2
1 ,y
E = aL
bs
31 / 78
Reduced energy functional
Minimization with respect to u and v leads to

Z h
1
1
E () =aL
(1 ) 2 sin2 2 + hi2 sin2 2
2
2
0

1
1
2
+ ( hi cos 2) + k ln
dy
| || sin |
2
1 ,y
bs
where hi =
1
h
Rh
0
(y ) dy
32 / 78
Energy minimization
If the resistance to dislocation motion is negligible, the true plastic
distortion minimizes the total energy
33 / 78
Energetic threshold
en =
2k | sin |
hbs | cos 2|
Size effect: the threshold value is inversely proportional to the size h.
34 / 78
Material parameter
Material
Aluminum
(GPa)
26.3
0.33
b (
A)
2.5
s (m2 )
1.834 103
k
0.000156
Table: Material characteristics
In all simulations h = 1m
35 / 78
c
b
0.0075
0.005
0.0025
-0.0025
-0.005
-0.0075
0.1
0.2
d
e
f
=30
=60
0.3
0.4
y-
Evolution of : a,d) = 0.0068, b,e) = 0.0118, c,f) = 0.0168

36 / 78
Stress strain curve
B
B
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
=30
=60
A
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
37 / 78
Non-zero dissipation
Non-zero resistance to dislocation motion: energy minimization is replaced
by the flow rule

D
=

for 6= 0, where
D = K ||

=
+
y ,y
Plastic distortion may evolve only if the yield condition || = K is fulfilled.

If || < K , then the plastic distortion is frozen
38 / 78
Yield condition
Differential equation
|k
,yy sin2
(1 ) sin2 2
b 2 2s
(cos2 2 + sin2 2)hi + cos 2| = K / = cr cos 2
Boundary conditions
(0) = (h) = 0
39 / 78
(y ) = r 1 (y ),
where
r = cr
j=30
j=60
b1
Graphs of 1 (
y)
40 / 78
Dislocation density
(y ) = r 1 (y )
a1
j=30
j=60
Graphs of 1 (
y)
41 / 78
Size effect for hardening rate

It is interesting to calculate the shear stress which is a measurable
quantity. During the loading, we have for the normalized shear stress
!
!
2 tanh h
2
= cr + r 1 1
1p cos 2
h
where 1p is calculated from the solution. The second term of this
equation causes the hardening due to the dislocations pile-up and
describes the size effect in this model.
42 / 78
Comparison

h/d=1.15
h/d=2.3
h/d=80
with dissipation
energy minimization
Shear stress vs. shear strain curve

43 / 78
Comparison
u,y
h/d=2.3
h/d=80
energy minimization
with dissipation

y/h
Shear strain profile

44 / 78
Loading program
Ct
O

B
Loading path
45 / 78
Bauschinger effect

B
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
-0.002
D-0.002
A
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008
0.01
Normalized shear stress versus shear strain curve for = 60

46 / 78
Double slip system
gh
y
h
s
m
jl
jr
Tensor of plastic distortion

ij (y ) = l (y )sil mjl + r (y )sir mjr
with l (y ) and r (y ) satisfying
l (0) = l (h) = r (0) = r (h) = 0
47 / 78
Strain measures
Total strain
xx = 0,
1
xy = u,y ,
2
yy = v,y
Plastic strains
1
pxx = (l sin 2l + r sin 2r ),
2
1
pxy = (l cos 2l + r cos 2r ),
2
1
p
yy = (l sin 2l + r sin 2r )
2
Elastic strain
1
exx = (l sin 2l + r sin 2r ),
2
1
e
xy = (u,y l cos 2l r cos 2r ),
2
1
eyy = v,y (l sin 2l + r sin 2r )
2
48 / 78
Nyes dislocation density

Non-zero components of Nyes dislocation density tensor
xz = l,y sin l cos l + r ,y sin r cos r
yz = l,y sin2 l + r ,y sin2 r
= l + r
1
1
= |l,y sin l | + |r ,y sin r |
b
b
49 / 78
Energetic threshold
en =
2k | sin |
hbs | cos 2|
Size effect: the threshold value is inversely proportional to the size h.

Mention that the energetic threshold value for the symmetric double slip is
equal to that of the single slip found in (Le & Sembiring, 2007).
50 / 78
Comparison
t/t0
h/d=40
h/d=80
h/d=160
h/d=240
with dissipation
energy minimization
g
Shear stress vs. shear strain curve
51 / 78
Comparison
u,y
h/d=80
energy minimization
with dissipation
g=0.0218
g=0.0168
g=0.0118
g=0.0068
y
_
h
The total shear strain profiles

52 / 78
Mechanism of twins formation
rotation
shear
b
t
g
TT
TT
TT
TT
TT
TT
j
u
j
l
hs
h(1-s)
x
The twin phase is formed by a twinning shear produced by the movement

of pre-existing dislocations to the boundary followed by a rigid rotation.
The described mechanism of twin formation is closely related to that of
Bullough (1957). The difference is that dislocations need not to glide
through each lattice plane.
53 / 78
Continuum model of deformation twinning

(
sil mjl
ij (y ) =
siu mju + t sil mjl + ij
for 0 < y < h(1 s),

for h(1 s) < y < h,
with (y ) satisfying the constraints:

(0) = (h) = (h(1 s)) = 0
The twinning shear is given by t = 2 cot
54 / 78
Plastic strains
The in-plane components of the plastic strain tensor pij = 21 (ij + ji ) read
1
1
pxx = sin 2 T sin 2l ,
2
2
1
1
pxy = cos 2 + T cos 2l ,
2
2
1
1
p
yy = sin 2 + T sin 2l ,
2
2
with the following quantities defined in the upper and lower part of the
crystal:
(
[u (y ), u , t ] h(1 s) < y < h,
[(y ), , T ] =
[l (y ), l , 0]
0 < y < h(1 s).
55 / 78
Dislocation density
da
Bi =ijnjda
Non-zero components of dislocation density tensor

xz = ,y sin cos ,
yz = ,y sin2

1q 2
1
2 = | || sin |
=
xz + yz
,y
b
b
56 / 78
Energy density
Free energy per unit volume of dislocated crystal

1
1
2
1 s
57 / 78
Energy functional
Z h
E (u, v , , s) = aL
0
2
1
2 v,y
+ 14 ( sin 2 + T sin 2l )2
+ 21 (u,y cos 2 T cos 2l )2

+ (v,y 12 sin 2 12 T sin 2l )2

1
dy .
+ k ln
| sin |
1 ,ybs
TWIP-alloys have rather low stacking fault energies, so the contribution of
surface energy to this functional can be neglected.
58 / 78
Condensed energy
E cond
E cond
0.0005
s = 0.1
s = 0.2
0.0004
s=0
0.0003
s = 0.4
s = 0.3 s = 0.5
s=1
0.0002
0.00001
s = 0.6
810-6
s = 0.7
610-6
s = 0.8
s = 0.9
0.0001
0.000012
410-6
-6
210
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
s=0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
Condensed energy E cond (s, ) = min E (, s, ) versus overall shear strain

for various volume fractions s (left) with a magnification (right) for
small values of s and small strains (clearly indicating that s = 0 minimizes
the energy in that region). The actual energy with evolving s follows the
path of least energy
59 / 78
0.0003
0.00025
0.8
0.0002
0.6
0.00015
0.4
0.0001
0.2
0.00005
0.05
b
lp
0.05
0.1
0.1
0.15
0.15
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.3
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.3
b
up
0.05
g
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
-0.005
g
g
-0.05
-0.01
-0.015
-0.1
-0.02
-0.15
-0.025
-0.03
-0.2
ll
lu
0.5
0.4
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.05
60 / 78
Stress-strain curve
t
/m
0.0012
0.001
0.0008
0.0006
0.0004
0.0002 A
C
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
61 / 78
Bending
y
m s
j
A single crystal beam is bent along a rigid cylinder. The displacements of

the lower face are prescribed
ux (x, 0) = r sin(x/r ) x,
uy (x, 0) = r cos(x/r ) r
Assumption: h a
62 / 78
Single slip system

ij = (x, y )si mj , s = (cos , sin ), m = ( sin , cos )
Plastic strains
1
1
1
pxx = sin 2, pyy = sin 2, pxy = cos 2
2
2
2
Dislocation density
xz = ,x cos2 + ,y cos sin ,
yz = ,x cos sin + ,y sin2
q
1
1
=
(xz )2 + (yz )2 = |,x cos + ,y sin |
b
b
63 / 78
Energy density
Free energy per unit volume of dislocated crystal

1
1
2
1 s
64 / 78
Energy functional of the bent beam

Z
aZ h
1
1
[ (ux,x + uy ,y )2 + (ux,x + sin 2)2
2
2
0
0
1
1
+ (uy ,y sin 2)2 + (ux,y + uy ,x cos 2)2
2
2
1
+ k ln
] dxdy
| cos +,y sin |
1 ,x
bs
I =
Because of the prescribed displacements at y = 0 dislocations cannot

reach the lower face of the beam which is in contact with the bending jig
in the deformed state, therefore
(x, 0) = 0
65 / 78
Reduced energy functional
Variational-asymptotic analysis reduces the energy functional containing

the small parameter h/a to
Z
aZ h
E1 =
[(cos
0
1
x
0
1 + 0 sin 2)2 + k|,y
sin |
r
2
1
0
+ k(,y
sin )2 ] dxdy
2
where is given by
=
1
,
1
66 / 78
Energy minimization
In the equilibrium state the true plastic distortion minimizes the total
energy
67 / 78
Smooth minimizer
The plastic distortion
(
1 (x, y )
0 (x, y ) =
0 (x)
for y (0, l(x)),

for y (l(x), h)
where
1 (x, y ) = 1p (1 cosh y + tanh l(x) sinh y )
r
2
x
2
1p =
(cos 1), =
cos
sin 2
r
k
Transcendental equation to determine l(x)
x
1)
r
1
1
+ 1p (1
)] sin 2) sin 2(h l(x)) = 0.
2
cosh l(x)
k sin + [(cos
68 / 78
Energetic threshold
Size effect: the threshold value depends on a and h
rcr =
a
arccos(1
k
2h cos )
Thus, if the radius of the bending jig r > rcr , then l(x) = 0 and = 0
everywhere yielding the purely elastic deformation without dislocations.
For r < rcr the dislocations are nucleated and pile-up against the lower
boundary y = 0 with x > x forming there the boundary layer.
69 / 78
Material parameter
Material
Zinc
(GPa)
43
0.25
b (
A)
2.68
s (m2 )
145.4
k
0.000156
Table: Material characteristics
In all simulations a = 10mm, h = 1.3mm, = 35 .
70 / 78
l
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
10
Function l(x).
71 / 78
0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
10
Function 0 (x).
72 / 78
Polygonization
During annealing dislocations may climb in the transversal direction and

then glide along the slip direction and be rearranged as shown in this
Figure.
73 / 78
After annealing
In the final polygonized relaxed state the dislocations form low angle tilt
boundaries between polygons which are perpendicular to the slip direction,
while inside the polygons there are no dislocations. We want to show that
this rearrangement of dislocations correspond to a sequence of piecewise
y ) reducing energy of the beam. Here and below check is
constant (x,
used to denote the polygonized relaxed state after annealing. The jump of
means the dislocations concentrated at the surface, therefore we ascribe
to each jump point the normalized Read-Shockley surface energy density
= |[[]]|
ln e ,
([[]])
|[[]]|
i ) = (x
i + 0) (x
i 0) denoting the jump of (x),
with [[]](x
b
= 4(1) , and the saturated misorientation angle.
74 / 78
Energy reducing sequence
0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
10
75 / 78
Number of polygons
The number of polygons can be estimated from above by requiring that the
increase of the surface energy is less than the reduction of the bulk energy
in gradient terms. For the material parameters of zinc, the estimated
average polygon distance (taken as the length of the beam divided by the
number of polygons) is equal to around 2.7 107 m which is in excellent
agreement with the experimental result obtained by Gilman in 1955.
100
lnN
80
60
40
20
0
r 10
76 / 78
Conclusions
CDT enables ones to model dislocation pile-up and size effects
There exists a threshold value for the dislocation nucleation
depending on the grain size
Work hardening and Bauschinger effect can properly be described
Deformation twins exhibit another type of non-convexity
Existence of distinct thresholds for the onset of deformation twinning
The stress-strain response exhibits a sharp load drop (followed by a
stress plateau) upon the onset of twinning
Polygonization occurs due to the smallness of the Read-Shockley
surface energy as compared with the bulk energy of distributed
dislocations
The rearrangement of dislocations is realized by the dislocation climb
with the subsequent dislocation glide.
High-temperature dislocation climb during annealing is crucial for the
kinetics of polygonization
77 / 78
Further works
Indentation
Bending and torsion
Particle strengthening
Multiple slip
CDT for polycrystals
Hall-Petch relation
Plastic zone near the crack tip and ductile fracture
Finite twinning shear and finite rotation
Parameter identification and applications to TWIP-alloys
3-D model
Dislocation climb taking into account the interaction with vacancies
Kinetics of polygonization
Formation of dislocation cell structure
78 / 78

Continuum Dislocation Theory Size

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Continuum Dislocation Theory Size

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Continuum dislocation theory: size effects and

Workshop on Multiscale Material Modeling, Bad Herrenalb 2012

Collaborators: V. Berdichevsky, D. Kochmann, Q.S. Nguyen,

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Size effects in crystal plasticity and formation of

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

TEM micrograph of the [

Polygonized state of a bent single crystal beam

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

View along intersections of slip planes with polygon boundaries in a

Why continuum dislocation theory?

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Thermodynamic framework of CDT

Small strain theory: unknown

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Dislocation density: ij = jkl il,k

Bi is the resultant Burgers vector of all GND (excess dislocations), whose

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Small up to moderate dislocation density

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Variational principles of CDT

Finite resistance to dislocation motion: Variational equation (Sedov,

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Antiplane constrained shear

A single crystal strip is placed in a hard device with the prescribed

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Single slip system

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

to rewrite the energy functional in the form

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

for x (0, l),

Function 1 (x) is subject to the boundary conditions

K.C. Le (Mechanik - Materialtheorie)

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Transcendental equation to determine l

CDT: size effects, microstructure

Bad Herrenalb workshop 2012

Dislocation density: ij = jkl il,k